The line motion illusion: The detection of counterchanging edge and surface contrast.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A version of the line motion illusion (LMI) occurs when one of two adjacent surfaces changes in luminance; a new surface is perceived sliding in front of the initially presented surface. Previous research has implicated high-level mechanisms that can create or modulate LMI motion via feedback to lower-level motion detectors. It is shown here that there also is a non-motion-energy, feedforward basis for LMI motion entailing the detection of counterchange, a spatial pattern of motion-specifying stimulus information that combines changes in edge contrast with oppositely signed changes in background-relative surface contrast. It was concluded that (1) in addition to LMI motion, edge/surface counterchange could be the basis for perceiving continuous object motion, (2) counterchange detection is the likely basis for third-order motion perception (Lu & Sperling, 1995a), and (3) motion energy and counterchange mechanisms could be composed of different arrangements of the same spatial and temporal filters, the former detecting motion at a single location, the latter detecting the motion path between pairs of locations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".